Thursday, January 03, 2013

in which I offer a not entirely serious review of a post by timothy michael law

This opinion piece examines the question of whether criticism of “author's style” should become a standard part of reviews of academic works. Paragraph 1 lays out the context in which these musings came about (i.e. the impending launch of the long-awaited Marginalia: A Review of Books in History, Theology & Religion) and defines the problem. Paragraphs 2 through 4 examine why the evaluation of author’s style is currently largely absent from reviews of academic literature while paragraphs 5 through 7 offers some general remarks on why it could be beneficial or indeed desirable. The closing paragraph invites the readers to offer their review of the piece, which is what we are doing here.

First, let us address the unspoken assumptions on which Dr. Law’s remarks are based:

There is something wrong with academic writing in terms of style ("Academic writing can be horrible") ...

... vis-a-vis a certain standard ("a brilliant example of prose") …

... and it’s entirely the author’s fault.

Nearly everyone is guilty of it at one point or another ("But is this not what *we* need in order to improve ourselves?").

This needs to be remedied ("But is this not what we need in order to *improve ourselves?*").

As for (1), even assuming that a definition of ‘style’ were provided (which it was not) and could be agreed upon (which we doubt), Dr. Law offers no evidence whatsoever of what he terms horrible academic writing. Without a working definition of the term ‘style’, one cannot even endeavor to guess what that horrible writing could be. Is it overuse of rhetorical questions? Or perhaps paragraphs of one sentence? We couldn’t possibly know, though it would appear that whatever horrible writing is, it can’t be as bad as poor argumentation, especially of the sort displayed here.

Assumptions (4) and (5) are essentially corollaries of (1) and should be replied to in the same manner (and the voice of Law and Order’s Jack McCoy, if possible): “Assuming facts not in evidence, your honor!” Assumption (3) ignores the crucial role of editor in the publishing process, but that’s just a minor quibble.

Fortunately for those of us who are still troubled by the question of what bad writing is, there is assumption (2) which presumes the existence of a gold standard for writing. Judging by its description using the adjective ‘brilliant’ and the noun ‘prose’ which often feature in reviews of fiction, it is there that one must look for model of great writing. Unfortunately, there is very little consensus on what it actually is. Every time the issue comes up, this reviewer is reminded of B. R. Myers’ “Reader’s Manifesto” where he examines the writing of some of the prize-winning American authors of recent decades. He finds the praise heaped on them more than undeserved and as a result, casts doubt on the validity or indeed utility of reviews of fiction. It would therefore appear that no clear standard of good, let alone brilliant, prose exists. And without such a clear standard, one would run the risk of academic reviews turning into the sort of vapid wankfest Myers rightly criticizes reviews of fiction for.

Or, Lord help us, it could get even worse: with no definition of ‘style’, reviewers (who like most people, even educated ones, don’t know shit about language) could take it to mean what non-linguists refer to as “grammar”. Soon, copies of Strunk and White would be pulled out and we would be subjected to the sort of uninformed outrage about leaving out adjectives and adverbs and not ending sentences with prepositions that makes Geoff Pullum very angry. And you don’t like him when he’s angry…

In short, Dr. Law has failed to demonstrate that (as he assumes) there really is a problem with bad writing in academic literature and if, that it is indeed pervasive and that it indeed needs to be addressed, if only in passing as a part of a review. And as to the central question of his piece, i.e. whether judgments on author’s style should be routinely included in reviews of academic literature? The simple answer is no. First, as we hope this review has demonstrated, reviewers of academic literature have enough on their hands dealing with conceptual and factual failings of reviewed works (and even that seems like too arduous a task for some). Second, if indeed everyone is guilty of bad writing, then criticizing somebody else’s bad writing would be not only a waste of time, but also a prime example of blind leading the blind and without a clear idea what good writing is, it would soon devolve into the sort of pointless quibblefest academics are known to sometimes engage in and routinely - and justifiably - mocked for. And finally, let us once more return to the issue of the gold standard for good writing: Even if there were one (and we hold that Myers above has shown that it isn't), it would only apply to fiction the purpose of which is to paint a picture with words and evoke emotions and all that other jazz fiction is good for. The purpose of academic literature is to convey information, argue points, outline theories. To insist that this be done in a brilliant prose (whatever that may be) is not only to put an extra burden on the author, but also to elevate form over content. To which I say, fuck that shit.

David, you're right. But "understandable and comprehensible" is a style, the "clear glass" style. And far too much academic writing lacks it. I agree that Law has not shown this by example (perhaps for fear of giving offense), but does it really need demonstration? Anyone who reads academic papers, even casually as I do, has seen plenty of horrible examples of illogic, unclarity, confusion, and mish-mash. This sort of thing deserves, but rarely gets, any sort of critical comment, whereas I have seen plenty of reviews that spend whole paragraphs enumerating obvious and non-misleading typographical errors.

Hello, I just receive my loan of $50,000 from Mr Joseph, after I was let than by other lenders, Mr Joseph Have really put a smile on my face, now I can take good care of my business and others personal needs, you can contact him with his email via: (Josephtylerfirm@gmail.com) contact him now for your loan he is a legit loan lender.

Slope-loving Lil Jon proves it’s easy to look hot in the cold. The rapper, never one for boring attire, Ray Ban Sunglassses Sale rocks Oakley’s eye catching Airbrake – the must-have goggle of this snow season.With an interchangeable fire iridium lens, the lightweight Airbrake ensures Lil Jon stands out above the ray ban sunglasses crowd. But that’s not the only reason Airbrake is coveted by the rapper and his fellow celebs. Built in Switchlock ray ban store technology means that when the weather changes, so can the Plutonite lens and with zero fuss. The luxurious comfort of the triple-layer polar fleece foam, which allows the Airbrake to fit comfortably with or without a helmet, will appeal to Lil Jonn too.As a keen boarder Lil Jon will be rbodm familiar with lens fogging and the problems it can cause. Airbrake stops fog in its track with Oakley's F3 Anti-Fog Technology. Even better, the cold is kept out cheap ray ban sunglasses thanks to a thermal barrier between the outer and inner lenses.For everything you need to launch your assault on the mountain this winter, look no further.Once a cheap ray ban sunglasses sale under 30$ reality TV star, now a TV star for real Hugo Taylor formerly of Made in Chelsea and ‘I’m Now a Celebrity Get Me Into Here’, is spotted leaving ray bans on sale the set of ITV’s Loose Women.And looking his usual suave, sharply dressed self too, niftily matching a smart, clean cut suit with a pair of black Polo 4064 cheap ray bans for sale sunglasses by Ralph Lauren.The now PR boss left the popular E4 series in 2012 to head into the jungle where he finished 5th. And how we rued cheap ray bans that day in MIC's history – Hugo was considered the one that was ‘actually alright’ from that particular jet-set.However it’s not just new-found TV popularity and these fine ray ban wayfarer Ralph Lauren sunglasses that Hugo loves. He has an immense knowledge of fine art too and he loves Arsenal Football Club and Formula One.And the Loose Women ray ban clubmaster guest appearance, where he discussed his time in the jungle and his plans for the future, adds to an increasing list of appearances, including featuring in OK! magazine’s Ray Ban Outlet

Positive site, where did u come up the information on this posting?I have read a few of the articles on your website now, and I really like your style. Thanks a million and please keep up the effective work.

About me and this blog

A Semitic philologist currently recovering from a serious case of corporate-work-induced burn-out. I have just finished a dissertation on constituent order in Maltese and currently work in digital humanities and on a bunch of academic projects involving languages and manuscripts.